NEW ZEALAND v BRITISH & IRISH LIONS, 1 July

                   
NEW ZEALAND v BRITISH & IRISH LIONS  
1 July 2017
KO: 19:35 NZST (8.35am BST)
WESTPAC Wellington Regional Stadium, Wellington

Live on Sky Sports HD

Referee: Jérôme Garcès (France)
ARs: [tbc]
TMO: [tbc]

A. Head to Head

39 Played 39
30 Won 6
3 Drawn 3
6 Lost 30
664 Points 360

B. Recent Form

24 June 2017
Eden Park, Auckland
30 – 15 to New Zealand

9 July 2005 
Eden Park, Auckland 
38 – 19 to New Zealand 

2 July 2005 
Westpac Stadium, Wellington 
48 – 18 to New Zealand

25 June 2005 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
21 – 3 to New Zealand

3 July 1993 
Eden Park, Auckland 
30 – 13 to New Zealand 

26 June 1993 
Athletic Park, Wellington 
7 – 20 to British & Irish Lions

12 June 1993 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
20 – 18 to New Zealand

16 July 1983 
Eden Park, Auckland 
38 – 6 to New Zealand

2 July 1983 
Carisbrook, Dunedin 
15 – 8 to New Zealand

18 June 1983 
Athletic Park (Wellington), Wellington 
9 – 0 to New Zealand

4 June 1983 
Lancaster Park, Christchurch 
16 – 12 to New Zealand

C. TEAMS:

NEW ZEALAND

[tbc]

BRITISH & IRISH LIONS  

[tbc]

*Something about welsh players and Gatland*

Just getting in first

A respected rugby pundit / commentator said on NZ Radio Sport today that Tipuric and Henderson should be in the 23

An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

Tbh there is a difference between rating him as a player and thinking he's a threat to the team isn't there? I'd agree unless there's a few injuries he's not close to being picked by gatland. That's different to whether I would pick him.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

Congratulations on scoring some tries versus club second teams. Dont see him having scored any test tries

Joking aside though it may enrage you further form behind the blue tinted glasses but its likely correct. Its hugley unlikley that any starters from the midweek game will make the second  test side, certainly as starters anyway. And regardless of who scored North or is / was infront of him in the pecking order. Class or straight up bias from Gtaland youd have to be pretty blind to reality to not accpet that.

As it is the current oustide backs did fine and are unlikely to change. Its also unlikely that Halfpenny would get dropped form the bench, if anything if we are being realistic hes more likely to get put into teh start 15 than dropped form the bench.  Neither Seymour nor North offer any utility of felxibility so arent ideal bench choices, and Williams more likely to get moved to wing ahead of them.

The third test is Seymours only hope and likely Norths too. And then its goign to take injuries to get him a place.

You may disagree with the decisions and way the selections have been handled and are likley to be handled going forward, but you cant deny that what the journalist wrote is probably true. Its unlikley that Seymour ewill get a test cap. Tough but honest.

The guy was a fringe pick for the squad in the first place.

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

Congratulations on scoring some tries versus club second teams. Dont see him having scored any test tries

Joking aside though it may enrage you further form behind the blue tinted glasses but its likely correct. Its hugley unlikley that any starters from the midweek game will make the second  test side, certainly as starters anyway. And regardless of who scored North or is / was infront of him in the pecking order. Class or straight up bias from Gtaland youd have to be pretty blind to reality to not accpet that.

As it is the current oustide backs did fine and are unlikely to change. Its also unlikely that Halfpenny would get dropped form the bench, if anything if we are being realistic hes more likely to get put into teh start 15 than dropped form the bench.  Neither Seymour nor North offer any utility of felxibility so arent ideal bench choices, and Williams more likely to get moved to wing ahead of them.

The third test is Seymours only hope and likely Norths too. And then its goign to take injuries to get him a place.

You may disagree with the decisions and way the selections have been handled and are likley to be handled going forward, but you cant deny that what the journalist wrote is probably true. Its unlikley that Seymour ewill get a test cap. Tough but honest.

The guy was a fringe pick for the squad in the first place.

This won't go down well North of the wall.

Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you

That's okay Griff. 

Everyone knows that you cannot criticise squad selection, team selection, tactics, any player's form, suggest in any way that certain players are not as good as any others or propose that another player's skillset is better suited to this opposition. Regardless of the sense of what you're saying, that is of course sour grapes, jingoism, a lack of patriotism, a lack of supportiveness, a lack of understanding of the hidden genius of certain players and/or a lack of understanding of how experience, passion and/or moral superiority contributes to a losing team. Usually all of the above. Everyone sees what they want to see and anyone criticising them just doesn't understand.

So I'll just leave these boards to the morally superior and wake up again after this whole jamboree has finished.

George Carlin wrote:That's okay Griff. 

Everyone knows that you cannot criticise squad selection, team selection, tactics, any player's form, suggest in any way that certain players are not as good as any others or propose that another player's skillset is better suited to this opposition. Regardless of the sense of what you're saying, that is of course sour grapes, jingoism, a lack of patriotism, a lack of supportiveness, a lack of understanding of the hidden genius of certain players and/or a lack of understanding of how experience, passion and/or moral superiority contributes to a losing team. Usually all of the above. Everyone sees what they want to see and anyone criticising them just doesn't understand.

So I'll just leave these boards to the morally superior and wake up again after this whole jamboree has finished.

Woah! Sense of humour needed for Mr Carlin.

I'm just stating it how it is, that this would not go down well. Which it didn't. Not sure why you're taking it out on me? Direct it to Gooseberry.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

In the interest of fairness and consistency, and to apply the logic that has been applied to other players, "you can't read much into good individual performances against weak mid-week teams". Isn't that what we've been hearing for weeks now?

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

*something about Chris Ashtons scoring record*

I must admit though Seymours stats are pretty impressive, especially as they dont get to be bulked up playing against the pourus scottish defence.

 The pure caps to tries is a bit misleading as it doesnt account for time on the pitch, but yeah if you were looking for a pure strike winger hes right up there chasing behind Watson (27 caps 13 tries) who for some reason you left off the list.

Its pretty clear and well known form his history that Gatland doesnt select his backs purely on their finishing ability. The back 3 selected are strong all rounders. Agree or disagree with the approach but the point remains that Seymour isnt likely to get selected barring injuries.

As it is the backs are pretty exciting and attack minded by Gatland standards. Most people are assuming his more likely to revert to North and Halfepnny (bulk and defence/kicking) over Seymours ability to scamper around taking all the glory.



*Actually scanning back to the initial joke comment after havinga  quick look at Seymours record ...half his tries have come against opposition raked outside the top 10 at the time of playing. Only 3 of his tries against teams ranked in the top 4 at the time of playing.
Flat track bully. (If you selectively ignore hes got a 1:1 ratio against New Zealand)

Griff wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

In the interest of fairness and consistency, and to apply the logic that has been applied to other players, "you can't read much into good  individual performances against weak mid-week teams".  Isn't that what we've been hearing for weeks now?

Those are test caps and test tries, strange how a great performance from Seymour is against poor/weakened opposition. Jullian Savea is poor opposition is he?

I've always maintained that the midweek players if on form deserve a crack at the All Blacks, I include Biggar in that bracket.

I dunno Griff, Lawes and Henderson play well and they have apparently "put their hands up for test consideration". Seymour has a cracker against All Black opposition Scudder and Savea and he isn't a threat to a test team.

It is absurd.

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

*something about Chris Ashtons scoring record*

I must admit though Seymours stats are pretty impressive, especially as they dont get to be bulked up playing against the pourus scottish defence.

 The pure caps to tries is a bit misleading as it doesnt account for time on the pitch, but yeah if you were looking for a pure strike winger hes right up there chasing behind Watson (27 caps 13 tries) who for some reason you left off the list.

Its pretty clear and well known form his history that Gatland doesnt select his backs purely on their finishing ability. The back 3 selected are strong all rounders. Agree or disagree with the approach but the point remains that Seymour isnt likely to get selected barring injuries.

As it is the backs are pretty exciting and attack minded by Gatland standards. Most people are assuming his more likely to revert to North and Halfepnny (bulk and defence/kicking) over Seymours ability to scamper around taking all the glory.

It's worth noting that the best finishing wing in the game (46 tries in 53 tests) didn't make the ABs 23 on Saturday either. Justice 4 the Bus!

Here are the changes I'd make, if I had to pick the squad today:

Vunipola
George
Furlong
Jones Itoje
Kruis Lawes
O'Mahony Stander
O'Brien
Faletau
Murray
Farrell
Daly
Te'o
Davies
Watson
Williams

Owens
McGrath
Sinckler
Itoje Henderson
Warburton Tipuric
Webb
Sexton Biggar
Halfpenny Joseph

Hard with Gatland running a load of these guys into the ground, but I'd pick this team.

The front row and the backs I've left, I think they'll be stronger for having another game together, but I've changed 4, 5 and 6 to try to match the AB's power.

Henderson on the bench can come on at lock or at 6, Tipuric would potentially start if he hadn't played the 80 in midweek. Then backs I've gone with players who have shown more attacking form over the tour to give another option late on.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Griff wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

In the interest of fairness and consistency, and to apply the logic that has been applied to other players, "you can't read much into good  individual performances against weak mid-week teams".  Isn't that what we've been hearing for weeks now?

Those are test caps and test tries, strange how a great performance from Seymour is against poor/weakened opposition. Jullian Savea is poor opposition is he?

I've always maintained that the midweek players if on form deserve a crack at the All Blacks, I include Biggar in that bracket.

I dunno Griff, Lawes and Henderson play well and they have apparently "put their hands up for test consideration". Seymour has a cracker against All Black opposition Scudder and Savea and he isn't a threat to a test team.

It is absurd.

Not my opinion, Radge. I'm just quoting what others use as a justification for why midweek players are not worthy of a test cap. It's impossible to champion players on here as they will always be met with derision. 'Tis the nature of these sh*tty boards.

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

*something about Chris Ashtons Marland Yarde's scoring record*

I must admit though Seymours stats are pretty impressive, especially as they dont get to be bulked up playing against the pourus scottish defence.

 The pure caps to tries is a bit misleading as it doesnt account for time on the pitch, but yeah if you were looking for a pure strike winger hes right up there chasing behind Watson (27 caps 13 tries) who for some reason you left off the list.

Its pretty clear and well known form his history that Gatland doesnt select his backs purely on their finishing ability. The back 3 selected are strong all rounders. Agree or disagree with the approach but the point remains that Seymour isnt likely to get selected barring injuries.

As it is the backs are pretty exciting and attack minded by Gatland standards. Most people are assuming his more likely to revert to North and Halfepnny (bulk and defence/kicking) over Seymours ability to scamper around taking all the glory.



*Actually scanning back to the initial joke comment after havinga  quick look at Seymours record ...half his tries have come against opposition raked outside the top 10 at the time of playing. Only 3 of his tries against teams ranked in the top 4 at the time of playing.
Flat track bully. (If you selectively ignore hes got a 1:1 ratio against New Zealand)

Fixed.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

Griff wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

In the interest of fairness and consistency, and to apply the logic that has been applied to other players, "you can't read much into good  individual performances against weak mid-week teams".  Isn't that what we've been hearing for weeks now?

Those are test caps and test tries, strange how a great performance from Seymour is against poor/weakened opposition. Jullian Savea is poor opposition is he?

I've always maintained that the midweek players if on form deserve a crack at the All Blacks, I include Biggar in that bracket.

I dunno Griff, Lawes and Henderson play well and they have apparently "put their hands up for test consideration". Seymour has a cracker against All Black opposition Scudder and Savea and he isn't a threat to a test team.

It is absurd.

We all know the biggest threat to the test team is Warburton getting recalled alongside AWJ but hey ....

Look jokes aside I can see some of that in what you say but ....
The pack is much more of an area of concern currently
Lawes hasnt just put his hand up in the one "too late" midweek game, hes been the outstanding lock on tour. Seymour may have scored tries but I think youre pushing it a bit to say hes been truely oustanding and offered a lot more than finishing.
You can still say someones put their hand up but has no relaistic chance of it actually happening. Id say exactly the same on Lawes, barring training injuries hes certainly not going to play in the next test. Unlike Seymour he doesnt have North infront of him.
Both were arguably fridge candidates in the first place and never seen as more than making up the numbers in the squad/reserves.

Whether you agree or not the outrage about being presneted with reality doesnt serve you well.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:Tommy Seymour 36 caps 16 trys
Liam Williams 43 caps 8 tries
Elliot Daly 13 caps 3 tries
Jack Nowell 31 caps 11 tries
Leigh Halfpenny 77 caps 13 tries
George North 81 caps 33 tries

All I'm saying is that the top try scorer on the tour is also has the best strike rate out of the available players, apart from North who hasn't had a good tour...

I know you were joking goose, but to be honest you should leave the jokes to Gatland, he's a bit better at it than you  

*something about Chris Ashtons scoring record*

I must admit though Seymours stats are pretty impressive, especially as they dont get to be bulked up playing against the pourus scottish defence.

 The pure caps to tries is a bit misleading as it doesnt account for time on the pitch, but yeah if you were looking for a pure strike winger hes right up there chasing behind Watson (27 caps 13 tries) who for some reason you left off the list.

Its pretty clear and well known form his history that Gatland doesnt select his backs purely on their finishing ability. The back 3 selected are strong all rounders. Agree or disagree with the approach but the point remains that Seymour isnt likely to get selected barring injuries.

As it is the backs are pretty exciting and attack minded by Gatland standards. Most people are assuming his more likely to revert to North and Halfepnny (bulk and defence/kicking) over Seymours ability to scamper around taking all the glory.

It's worth noting that the best finishing wing in the game (46 tries in 53 tests) didn't make the ABs 23 on Saturday either. Justice 4 the Bus!

Youre just showing off now!

Griff, do you think Gatland might jack coaching in after this tour and return to NZ? Hypothetically and probably in reality, if we lose the next 2 tests badly and the media storm over this and the 'geographical 6' call ups continues to be a story, do you think it'll be like Graham Henry all over again and he'll walk away?

I think what RDW was alluding to was the general tone of the article. There was a whole paragraph dedicated to North's try, whereas Seymours double received a cursory one liner.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

What is inaccurate with the comment on the Beeb? The journalists out there know that the chances of Seymour being selected are close to zip. The comment was more a reflection on selection than one about Seymour.

PS they talk about North as they had been led to believe that he had a chance of playing in T2.

1. Marler
2. Owens
3. Furlong
4. Itoje
5. Kruis
6. SOB
7. Tipuric
8. Faletau
9. Murray
10. Farrell
11. Watson
12. Teo
13. JD2
14. Daly
15. Williams

16. Vunipola
17. George
18. Sinckler
19. Henderson
20. Stander
21. Webb
22. Biggar
23. Joseph

I'd look to play a more set-piece orientated front row and bring on a big dynamic replacements to step up the intensity in the loose.
Kruis stays to run the lineout which was decent.
Tips comes in at 7 to help at the breakdown, SOB moves to 6 (Tips is also a very good lineout option replacing POM).
Henderson/Stander on the bench to add physicality/dynamism in the loose later in the game.
Backline as you are again to start with but with Biggar on the bench (surprisingly, as a welsh fan especially, Biggars been the most attacking 10 on tour - that we've seen play....).

LondonTiger wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

What is inaccurate with the comment on the Beeb? The journalists out there know that the chances of Seymour being selected are close to zip. The comment was more a reflection on selection than one about Seymour.

PS they talk about North as they had been led to believe that he had a chance of playing in T2.

It's just hugely annoying that when Seymour scores a double, and becomes the top try scorer on the tour, the reporting then dismisses him out of hand.  The sentance RDW has quoted is juxtstaposed with the following very vivid account of North's contribution to the game.

"There were also gains to be made by the likes of George North, perhaps a surprise omission from the first Test squad in Auckland. The Welshman crossed for a classic winger's try, despite playing much of the game in the centre following an early injury to Robbie Henshaw. Forced into a partnership at inside centre with Jonathan Joseph outside him, North popped up on Henderson's shoulder in the first half and accelerated away from the cover defence for his first try of the tour. He could have had two tries, but for a foot in touch. It was a positive audition from a player out of position, whose explosive power and ability to make yards beyond the tackle could be used by Gatland on Saturday."

Classic 606v2 stuff here - champion one player by playing down another. Can't we just be happy that they both (Seymour and North) had good games?

Griff wrote:Classic 606v2 stuff here - champion one player by playing down another.  Can't we just be happy that they both (Seymour and North) had good games?

Griff - I have absolutley no problem with people praising North. I think he is a damn good player, and I actually would probably have him over Seymour if I were picking a test squad. But you can't read that beeb article and tell me it's balanced?

EST wrote:

Griff wrote:Classic 606v2 stuff here - champion one player by playing down another.  Can't we just be happy that they both (Seymour and North) had good games?

Griff - I have absolutley no problem with people praising North.  I think he is a damn good player, and I actually would probably have him over Seymour if I were picking a test squad.  But you can't read that beeb article and tell me it's balanced?  

Just a general observation over the weeks on here, EST. Not your post in particular. But I notice that in order to push the case for their favourite players posters often try to denigrate other players in an attempt to push their favourites into the limelight. North has not had a great tournament. Not awful, not many mistakes, but hasn't done a great deal. But yesterday he had a good game. I just think it's great that both wingers (well, North was wing and centre at different times!) did well.

Breadvan wrote:Griff, do you think Gatland might jack coaching in after this tour and return to NZ? Hypothetically and probably in reality, if we lose the next 2 tests badly and the media storm over this and the 'geographical 6' call ups continues to be a story, do you think it'll be like Graham Henry all over again and he'll walk away?

I would hope not. I can't bear to watch another game with Howley and McBryde in charge.

EST. The question comes down to whether you think Gatland will pick seymour on saturday. Do you think it will happen?

Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

Personally think Seymour has struggled on tour. His tries don't change that when I look at his overall contribution. North too.

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

Say it aint so!

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

Just what I've heard. POM has a knock and Warbs is well, Warbs (sicknote)

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

You're just saying that to make me feel better

No 7&1/2 wrote:EST. The question comes down to whether you think Gatland will pick seymour on saturday. Do you think it will happen?

No, I don't - and I wouldn't either. I also wouldn't pick North. They have both shown defensive frailties on tour, and I think Watson and Daly are currently playing better, despite their positive contributions against the Canes . They also both only cover wing, redcuing their suitability for the bench.

It's the tone of the article which annoys me, 7.5. It waxes lyrical about North's involvement (which is fine), and then dismisses Seymours contribution in one sentence. All i'm looking for is some balance.

EST wrote: All i'm looking for is some balance.

You don't get that on here. Kruis had a stinker on the weekend for example, but that was all AWJ fault apparently.

EST wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

What is inaccurate with the comment on the Beeb? The journalists out there know that the chances of Seymour being selected are close to zip. The comment was more a reflection on selection than one about Seymour.

PS they talk about North as they had been led to believe that he had a chance of playing in T2.

It's just hugely annoying that when Seymour scores a double, and becomes the top try scorer on the tour, the reporting then dismisses him out of hand.  The sentance RDW has quoted is juxtstaposed with the following very vivid account of North's contribution to the game.

"There were also gains to be made by the likes of George North, perhaps a surprise omission from the first Test squad in Auckland. The Welshman crossed for a classic winger's try, despite playing much of the game in the centre following an early injury to Robbie Henshaw.  Forced into a partnership at inside centre with Jonathan Joseph outside him, North popped up on Henderson's shoulder in the first half and accelerated away from the cover defence for his first try of the tour. He could have had two tries, but for a foot in touch. It was a positive audition from a player out of position, whose explosive power and ability to make yards beyond the tackle could be used by Gatland on Saturday."

I feel you guys are using that to feed a persecution complex.

Now in some ways it is reasonable to have such a complex, but the persecutor is not the Beeb. Perhaps they should have added something about him playing well but as it stands the comment they make was 100% accurate.

Again, I feel they are talking about North simply because he is in contention for a test spot, whereas Seymour could have played the best game of his life and still would not have been considered.

mikey_dragon wrote:

EST wrote: All i'm looking for is some balance.

You don't get that on here. Kruis had a stinker on the weekend for example, but that was all AWJ fault apparently.

Don't think that's fair.

Kruis' lack of performance in the loose has been noted by quite a few people on here. But Kruis still ran an absolute top class lineout and would also have the advantage of regularly partnering Itoje should Gatland decide to go with a tried and tested combination.

With that in mind, I don't think it's sensational to suggest AWJ is the more likely candidate for being dropped. Why do you?

cascough wrote:

With that in mind, I don't think it's sensational to suggest AWJ is the more likely candidate for being dropped. Why do you?

I guess you haven't seen my team selection? You might want to go back and look for it before making more daft statements.

You need fast, physical and skillful forwards to compete with NZ. Itoje, Lawes, Tipuric, Sinckler are our best players in that mould at present, I'd like to see them starting.

cascough wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

EST wrote: All i'm looking for is some balance.

You don't get that on here. Kruis had a stinker on the weekend for example, but that was all AWJ fault apparently.

Don't think that's fair.

Kruis' lack of performance in the loose has been noted by quite a few people on here. But Kruis still ran an absolute top class lineout and would also have the advantage of regularly partnering Itoje should Gatland decide to go with a tried and tested combination.

With that in mind, I don't think it's sensational to suggest AWJ is the more likely candidate for being dropped. Why do you?

See the poster in question for the answer to your question

mikey_dragon wrote:

cascough wrote:

With that in mind, I don't think it's sensational to suggest AWJ is the more likely candidate for being dropped. Why do you?

I guess you haven't seen my team selection? You might want to go back and look for it before making more daft statements.

You will have to explain to me how your team selection has any bearing on you deriding criticism of AWJ whilst simultaneously implying Kruis has escaped from criticism.

mikey_dragon wrote:

EST wrote: All i'm looking for is some balance.

You don't get that on here. Kruis had a stinker on the weekend for example, but that was all AWJ fault apparently.

They both had stinkers - worst 2 players in the team and the biggest single reason we lost - totally outgunned in the second row

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

When is the team announced? Rory Best should captain the team. He has been the best captain on the tour and prior to the tour. He would also solve a lot of the breakdown and gainl ine issues and provide excellent leadership.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

When is the team announced? Rory Best should captain the team. He has been the best captain on the tour and prior to the tour. He would also solve a lot of the breakdown and gainl ine issues and provide excellent leadership.

Maybe, so who do we get to throw the ball in at Lineouts?

LondonTiger wrote:

EST wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:An unsuspected rugby BBC Pundit said the leading try scorer on the tour isn't a threat to the test team...

That other guy, Penalty is the next highest scorer for the Lions.

Some dingbat at the BBC wrote:Scotland winger Seymour, despite not being a real threat to the Test team, also profited in Wellington in what was probably his final game in a Lions shirt in New Zealand.

This tour has taken a turn for the surreal.

What is inaccurate with the comment on the Beeb? The journalists out there know that the chances of Seymour being selected are close to zip. The comment was more a reflection on selection than one about Seymour.

PS they talk about North as they had been led to believe that he had a chance of playing in T2.

It's just hugely annoying that when Seymour scores a double, and becomes the top try scorer on the tour, the reporting then dismisses him out of hand.  The sentance RDW has quoted is juxtstaposed with the following very vivid account of North's contribution to the game.

"There were also gains to be made by the likes of George North, perhaps a surprise omission from the first Test squad in Auckland. The Welshman crossed for a classic winger's try, despite playing much of the game in the centre following an early injury to Robbie Henshaw.  Forced into a partnership at inside centre with Jonathan Joseph outside him, North popped up on Henderson's shoulder in the first half and accelerated away from the cover defence for his first try of the tour. He could have had two tries, but for a foot in touch. It was a positive audition from a player out of position, whose explosive power and ability to make yards beyond the tackle could be used by Gatland on Saturday."

I feel you guys are using that to feed a persecution complex.

Now in some ways it is reasonable to have such a complex, but the persecutor is not the Beeb. Perhaps they should have added something about him playing well but as it stands the comment they make was 100% accurate.

Again, I feel they are talking about North simply because he is in contention for a test spot, whereas Seymour could have played the best game of his life and still would not have been considered.

I'm aware that me making a point out of this can be taken as another whinging Scotsman grumbling about how unfair everything is, but to be honest, I would challenge anybody to read that article and think that it wasn't dismissive of Seymour - it is so blatantly obvious. For what it's worth, I am not complaining about the accuracy. However, there are other ways of saying he probably wont make the test squad, without sounding quite so contemptuous.

It may not seem like much, but it's a pretty typical narrative - the Telegraph yesterday gave Nowell 8/10 and Seymour 7/10 as another example.

TightHEAD wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

When is the team announced? Rory Best should captain the team. He has been the best captain on the tour and prior to the tour. He would also solve a lot of the breakdown and gainl ine issues and provide excellent leadership.

Maybe, so who do we get to throw the ball in at Lineouts?

This really sums it up. 3 players who should be capatin dont ddeserve a place in the side. A fourth who was given the job didnt cut it.

Meanwhile Harltley is enjoing a nice cold pint of bitter at home watching people squabble over who is less rubbish than George.



Theres going to have to be a dodgy selection somewhere. At least one poorly perfomring player will have to be sleected if we want a Captain.

TightHEAD wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Rumors are that AWJ to captain the team.

If true, would mean no Warburton and probably no POM so the earlier post of SOB Tipuric Faletau might happen.

When is the team announced? Rory Best should captain the team. He has been the best captain on the tour and prior to the tour. He would also solve a lot of the breakdown and gainl ine issues and provide excellent leadership.

Maybe, so who do we get to throw the ball in at Lineouts?

How many lineouts has he missed per game. 1 maybe?

I don't think he missed any in his last match either. Dont think it is as big an issue as getting dominated at the breakdown and gainline for 80 minutes. The ABs dominated all the forward stats in the first test yet Ireland dominated all the forward stats in two tests v the ABs last year with best as hooker including the lineout. Not saying he can do it all himself but he is a much better player overall than George.

cascough wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

cascough wrote:

With that in mind, I don't think it's sensational to suggest AWJ is the more likely candidate for being dropped. Why do you?

I guess you haven't seen my team selection? You might want to go back and look for it before making more daft statements.

You will have to explain to me how your team selection has any bearing on you deriding criticism of AWJ whilst simultaneously implying Kruis has escaped from criticism.

Well if you actually bother to look at my team selection you'd note it features Kruis as a starter, with no sign of AWJ. Surely that answers your question - if not that that's three times you've spectacularly missed my point.